MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391814259 · doi:10.3390/asi7010016

Deep Learning Method to Detect Missing Welds for Joist Assembly Line

2024· article· en· W4391814259 on OpenAlexafffund
Hamed Raoofi, Asa Sabahnia, Daniel Barbeau, Ali Motamedi

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied System Innovation · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWelding Techniques and Residual Stresses
Canadian institutionsCanam Group (Canada)École de Technologie Supérieure
FundersMitacs
KeywordsJoistLine (geometry)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceSpeech recognitionEngineeringStructural engineeringMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traditional methods of supervision in the construction industry are time-consuming and costly, requiring significant investments in skilled labor. However, with advancements in artificial intelligence, computer vision, and deep learning, these methods can now be automated, resulting in time and cost savings, as well as improvements in product quality. This research focuses on the application of computer vision approaches to monitor the quality of welding in prefabricated steel elements. A high-performance network was designed, consisting of a video capturing station, a customized classifier based on a YOLOv4 detector and an IoU tracker, and a user interface software for any interaction with quality control workers. The network demonstrated over 98% accuracy in identifying steel connection types and detecting missed welds on the assembly line in real-time. Extensive validation was conducted using a large dataset from a real production environment. The proposed framework aims to reduce rework, minimize hazards, and enhance product quality. This research contributes to the automation of quality control processes in the construction industry.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.272 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied System InnovationSame topicWelding Techniques and Residual StressesFrench-language works237,207